DOCSLIB.ORG

Blueberry Willow): a Technical Conservation Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Salix myrtillifolia Anderss. (blueberry willow): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project June 29, 2006 Stephanie L. Neid, Ph.D., Karin Decker, and David G. Anderson Colorado Natural Heritage Program Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO Peer Review Administered by Society for Conservation Biology Neid, S.L., K. Decker, and D.G. Anderson. (2006, June 29). Salix myrtillifolia Anderss. (blueberry willow): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/salixmyrtillifolia.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was greatly facilitated by the helpfulness and generosity of many experts, particularly George Argus, Robert Dorn, Bud Kovalchik, Steve Brunsfield, John Sanderson, and Barry Johnston. Their interest in the project, valuable insight, depth of experience, and time spent answering questions were extremely valuable and crucial to the project. Herbarium specimen label data were provided by Tim Hogan (COLO), Ron Hartman and Ernie Nelson (RM), and Janet Wingate (KDH). Thanks also to Cathy Cripps, Bonnie Heidel, George Jones, Chris Chappel, Rex Crawford, Florence Caplow, Scott Mincemoyer, Andy Kratz, Kathy Carsey, and Beth Burkhart for assisting with questions and project management. Jane Nusbaum, Dawn Taylor, and Barbara Brayfield provided crucial financial oversight. AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES Stephanie L. Neid is an ecologist with the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). Her work at CNHP includes ecological inventory and assessment throughout Colorado, beginning in 2004. Prior to this, she was an ecologist with the New Hampshire Natural Heritage Bureau and the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program and was a Regional Vegetation Ecologist for NatureServe. She has been working in the fields of ecology and botany since 1993, including four summers teaching at the Lake Itasca Biology Station in northern Minnesota, and working for The Nature Conservancy, the Morris Arboretum and the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. She received a B.A. in Botany and in Biology from the University of Iowa (1992) and a Ph.D. in Plant Biological Sciences from the University of Minnesota (2000), where she studied the effects of de-icing salts on roadside vegetation. Karin Decker is an ecologist with the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). She works with CNHP’s Ecology and Botany teams, providing ecological, statistical, GIS, and computing expertise for a variety of projects. She has worked with CNHP since 2000. Prior to this, she was an ecologist with the Colorado Natural Areas Program in Denver for four years. She is a Colorado native who has been working in the field of ecology since 1990, including four summers at the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory in Gothic, Colorado. Before returning to school to become an ecologist she graduated from the University of Northern Colorado with a B.A. in Music (1982). She received an M.S. in Ecology from the University of Nebraska (1997), where her thesis research investigated sex ratios and sex allocation in a dioecious annual plant. David G. Anderson is a botanist with the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). Mr. Anderson’s work at CNHP includes inventory and mapping of rare plants throughout Colorado, mapping weeds, maintaining and updating CNHP’s database, and writing reports on the rare plants of Colorado. He has worked with CNHP since 1999. Much of Mr. Anderson’s prior experience comes from five years of fieldwork studying the flora and ecosystem processes of the Alaskan and Canadian Arctic. Mr. Anderson also served in the Peace Corps as a science teacher in the Solomon Islands from 1996 to 1998. Mr. Anderson received his B.A. in Environmental, Populational, and Organismic Biology from the University of Colorado, Boulder (1991) and his M.S. in Botany from the University of Washington, Seattle (1996). COVER PHOTO CREDIT Salix myrtillifolia (blueberry willow). Photograph by Janet Coles; use of the photo provided by the Colorado Natural Areas Program. 2 3 SUMMARY OF KEY COMPONENTS FOR CONSERVATION OF SALIX MYRTILLIFOLIA Status Salix myrtillifolia (blueberry willow) is a boreal species that occurs as a relictual disjunct in the Rocky Mountain Region (Region 2) of the USDA Forest Service (USFS). Populations are known only from highly specialized, extremely rich fens in two disjunct areas in Region 2, the mountains of central Colorado and of northwestern Wyoming. Of eight known locations of S. myrtillifolia in Region 2, two are within the management jurisdiction of the USFS. These include one location in the Swamp Lake Special Botanical Area on the Shoshone National Forest in Wyoming and one on the Pike-San Isabel National Forest in Colorado. Salix myrtillifolia is considered a sensitive species in Region 2. It is ranked G5 (secure - common; widespread and abundant) in its global range by NatureServe, but considered rare (S1; critically imperiled) by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program and Wyoming Natural Diversity Database because of its very limited distribution in these states. It is not listed as threatened or endangered on the federal endangered species list. Primary Threats Primary threats to Salix myrtillifolia in Region 2 are hydrologic alteration, peat mining, and global climate change. In addition to these general threats, site-specific threats to S. myrtillifolia include livestock grazing and catastrophic fire. The habitat of S. myrtillifolia in Region 2 is extremely rich fens, which are complex wetlands maintained by unique hydrology. They are particularly restricted in distribution and abundance and sensitive to environmental perturbation. Certain types of habitat degradation may produce impacts from which these fens cannot be restored. Therefore, every effort should be made to prevent degradation of water quality and alteration of the natural hydrologic regime of these wetlands, including the quantity of water reaching the wetland and the inter- and intra- annual variation in the water table. The single occurrence of Salix myrtillifolia at Swamp Lake on the Shoshone National Forest in Wyoming may be at risk due to a unique threat, an absence of male plants. This population is only able to reproduce vegetatively and unable to produce viable seeds. Primary Conservation Elements, Management Implications and Considerations Our current understanding of Salix myrtillifolia distribution and abundance in Region 2 suggests that the species is vulnerable in the Rocky Mountain Region due to its small number of disjunct occurrences in a very rare and specialized habitat. Any management activities that maintain a natural hydrologic regime for these habitats, such as the regulation and monitoring of hydrological modifications, will promote the persistence ofS. myrtillifolia in Region 2. Our current understanding of the distribution and abundance of S. myrtillifolia also suggests that it should remain a species of concern, and that land management personnel should focus on expanding our knowledge of its biology and habitat. 2 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..............................................................................................................................................2 AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES .........................................................................................................................................2 COVER PHOTO CREDIT .............................................................................................................................................2 SUMMARY OF KEY COMPONENTS FOR CONSERVATION OF SALIX MYRTILLIFOLIA .................................3 Status..........................................................................................................................................................................3 Primary Threats..........................................................................................................................................................3 Primary Conservation Elements, Management Implications and Considerations.....................................................3 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ...............................................................................................................................6 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................................................7 Goal of Assessment....................................................................................................................................................7 Scope of Assessment..................................................................................................................................................8 Treatment of Uncertainty in Assessment ...................................................................................................................8 Treatment of This Document as a Web Publication...................................................................................................8 Peer Review of This Document .................................................................................................................................9 MANAGEMENT STATUS AND NATURAL HISTORY .............................................................................................9 Management Status ....................................................................................................................................................9
Recommended publications
  • Willows of Interior Alaska

    Willows of Interior Alaska

    1 Willows of Interior Alaska Dominique M. Collet US Fish and Wildlife Service 2004 2 Willows of Interior Alaska Acknowledgements The development of this willow guide has been made possible thanks to funding from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge - order 70181-12-M692. Funding for printing was made available through a collaborative partnership of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Alaska, Department of Defense; Pacific North- west Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture; National Park Service, and Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior; and Bonanza Creek Long Term Ecological Research Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks. The data for the distribution maps were provided by George Argus, Al Batten, Garry Davies, Rob deVelice, and Carolyn Parker. Carol Griswold, George Argus, Les Viereck and Delia Person provided much improvement to the manuscript by their careful editing and suggestions. I want to thank Delia Person, of the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, for initiating and following through with the development and printing of this guide. Most of all, I am especially grateful to Pamela Houston whose support made the writing of this guide possible. Any errors or omissions are solely the responsibility of the author. Disclaimer This publication is designed to provide accurate information on willows from interior Alaska. If expert knowledge is required, services of an experienced botanist should be sought. Contents
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."

    "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."

    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
  • Salix Arizonica Dorn (Arizona Willow)

    Salix Arizonica Dorn (Arizona Willow)

    1. Species [12.53 1]: Salix arizonica Dorn (Arizona willow). 2. Status: Table 1 summarizes the current status of this plant by various ranking entity and defines the meaning of the status. Table 1. Current status of Salix arizonica Entity Status Status Definition NatureServe G2G3c G2--Imperiled—At high risk of extinction or elimination due to very restricted range, very few populations, steep declines, or other factors. G3--Vulnerable—At moderate risk of extinction or elimination due to a restricted range, relatively few populations, recent and widespread declines, or other factors. CNHPa G2G3c G2--Globally imperiled; typically 6 to 20 occurrences. G3--Globally vulnerable; typically 21 to 100 occurrences. CNHP S1 State critically imperiled; typically 5 or fewer occurrences. USDA Forest Sensitive Species identified by a regional forester for which population viability is a concern, as Service evidenced by: a) significant current or predicted downward trends in population numbers or density, or b) significant current or predicted downward trends in habitat capability that would reduce a species’ existing distribution. USDI FWSb Not Not federally recognized under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as endangered, Listed threatened, proposed, or candidate species. a Colorado Natural Heritage Program. b US Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. c A range between two of the numeric ranks; indicates uncertainty about the rarity of the element. The 2012 U.S. Forest Service Planning Rule defines Species of Conservation Concern (SCC) as “a species, other than federally recognized threatened, endangered, proposed, or candidate species, that is known to occur in the plan area and for which the regional forester has determined that the best available scientific information indicates substantial concern about the species' capability to persist over the long- term in the plan area” (36 CFR 219.9).
  • Plant Species of Special Concern and Vascular Plant Flora of the National

    Plant Species of Special Concern and Vascular Plant Flora of the National

    Plant Species of Special Concern and Vascular Plant Flora of the National Elk Refuge Prepared for the US Fish and Wildlife Service National Elk Refuge By Walter Fertig Wyoming Natural Diversity Database The Nature Conservancy 1604 Grand Avenue Laramie, WY 82070 February 28, 1998 Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following individuals for their assistance with this project: Jim Ozenberger, ecologist with the Jackson Ranger District of Bridger-Teton National Forest, for guiding me in his canoe on Flat Creek and for providing aerial photographs and lodging; Jennifer Whipple, Yellowstone National Park botanist, for field assistance and help with field identification of rare Carex species; Dr. David Cooper of Colorado State University, for sharing field information from his 1994 studies; Dr. Ron Hartman and Ernie Nelson of the Rocky Mountain Herbarium, for providing access to unmounted collections by Michele Potkin and others from the National Elk Refuge; Dr. Anton Reznicek of the University of Michigan, for confirming the identification of several problematic Carex specimens; Dr. Robert Dorn for confirming the identification of several vegetative Salix specimens; and lastly Bruce Smith and the staff of the National Elk Refuge for providing funding and logistical support and for allowing me free rein to roam the refuge for plants. 2 Table of Contents Page Introduction . 6 Study Area . 6 Methods . 8 Results . 10 Vascular Plant Flora of the National Elk Refuge . 10 Plant Species of Special Concern . 10 Species Summaries . 23 Aster borealis . 24 Astragalus terminalis . 26 Carex buxbaumii . 28 Carex parryana var. parryana . 30 Carex sartwellii . 32 Carex scirpoidea var. scirpiformis .
  • Major Indicator Shrubs and Herbs in Riparian Zones on National Forests of Central Oregon

    Major Indicator Shrubs and Herbs in Riparian Zones on National Forests of Central Oregon

    United States Department of Major Indicator Shrubs and Agriculture Herbs in Riparian Zones on Forest Service National Forests of Pacific Northwest Central Oregon. Region by Bernard L. Kovaichik William E. Hopkins and Steven J. Brunsfeld Major Indicator Shrubs and Herbs in Riparian Zones on National Forests of Central Oregon By Bernard L. Kovaichik, Area IV Riparian Ecologist William E. Hopkins, Area IV Area Ecologist and Steven J. Brunsfeld, University of Idaho June, 1988 1988 USDA - Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region R6-ECOL-TP-005-88 I Acknowledgements: The authors wish to thank all those who kindlydonated their time to this publication. Thanks to Bill Hopkins and Rob Rawlings for blazingthe trail with their "Major indicator shrubs and herbson National Forests in eastern Oregon" (Hopkins and Rawlings, 1985). They developedthe format for this style of guide."Major indicator shrubs and herbs on National Forests of western Oregon and southwestern Washington"(Halverson and others, 1986) follows a similar format andwas another resource for developing this guide. Thanks to Carl Burke for illustrating some of thesketches in the glossary and Nancy Halverson, Linda Newman and Nancy Shaw forediting the document.Thanks to David Mattson for his sketch of eastwood willow. Photo credits: Bernard L. Kovalchik Steven J. Brunsfeld Wayne D. Padgett Line drawings used by permission from: Hitchcock, C. L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownberg and J. W. Thompson.1977. Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest. Vol. 1-5. Univ. of Washington Press. Seattle. 2978p. Brunsfeld, S. J. and F. D. Johnson. 1985. Field guide to thewillows of east-central Idaho. Forest, Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station Bull.
  • COYOTE WILLOW Willow Is Gathered from the Time the Leaves Fall in Autumn Until the Buds Begin to Swell in Spring

    COYOTE WILLOW Willow Is Gathered from the Time the Leaves Fall in Autumn Until the Buds Begin to Swell in Spring

    COYOTE WILLOW Willow is gathered from the time the leaves fall in autumn until the buds begin to swell in spring. The Salix exigua Nutt. year-old wands without branches are chosen, and plant symbol = SAEX sorted by size and length. The bark can easily be stripped off in the spring when the sap rises. Willow Contributed By: USDA, NRCS, National Plant Data wands with the smallest leaf scars are split and peeled Center, New Mexico Plant Materials Center, & Idaho to obtain the tough, flexible sapwood used for the Plant Materials Center weft in basket weaving. Color variation is achieved by alternating peeled and unpeeled willow sticks in the warp. Ute Indians used to concoct a green dye for coloring buckskin by soaking willow leaves in hot water and then boiling the mixture to concentrate the pigment. Willow roots also have been used by others to manufacture a rose-tan dye. The Paiute built willow-frame houses covered with Alfred Brousseau mats of cattails or tules. Slender willow withes were Brother Eric Vogel, St. Mary’s College @ CalPhotos woven into tight circular fences as protection from the wind that blew sand into eyes and food. For shade, shed roofs thatched with willows, called Alternate Names "willow shadows", were constructed. In the Pueblo Sandbar willow, gray willow, narrow-leaved willow, province, coyote willow branches are employed with dusky willow, pussywillow leaves attached for thatching roofs. Other light construction uses included the tops of storage bins or Uses racks for aerating corn while it dried, such as one Ethnobotanic: The value of willow as the raw recently unearthed at prehistoric Arroyo Hondo material necessary for the manufacture of a family's Pueblo.
  • Vascular Plants of Kluane

    Vascular Plants of Kluane

    26 Blueleaved strawberry Fragaria virginiana 63 Greyleaf willow Salix glauca Kluane National Park and Reserve 27 Bog blueberrry Vaccinium uliginosum 64 Ground cedar, Lycopodium complanatum 28 Bog labrador-tea Ledum groenlandica Creeping jenny 65 Hairy rockcress Arabis hirsuta 29 Boreal aster Aster alpinus 30 Boreal wormwood Artemisia arctica 66 Heart-leaf listera Listera borealis Vascular 31 Bristly stickseed Lappula myosotis 67 Heartleaf arnica Arnica cordifolia 32 Broadglumed wheatgrass Agropyron trachycaulum 68 High bush cranbery Viburnum edule Plants List 33 Broadleaf lupine Lupinus arcticus 69 Holboell's rockcress Arabis holboellii 34 Buffaloberry, Soapberry Sheperdia canadensis 70 Horned dandelion Taraxacum lacerum 35 Canada butterweed Senecio pauperculus 71 Kotzebue's grass-of- Parnassia kotzebuei 36 Chestnut rush Juncus castaneus parnassus 1 Alaska moss heath Cassiope stelleriana 37 Cleft-leaf groundsel Senecio streptanthifolius 72 Kuchei's lupine Lupinus kuschei 2 Alaska willow Salix alaxensis 38 Common horsetail Equisetum arvense 73 Labrador lousewort Pedicularis labradorica 3 Alkali bluegrass Poa juncifolia 39 Common mountain Juniperus communis 74 Lance-leaved draba Draba lanceolata 4 Alkali grass Puccinellia interior juniper 75 Lanceleaved stonecrop Sedum lanceolatum 5 Alpine bluegrass Poa alpina 40 Cow parsnip Heracleum lanatum 76 Lapland cassiope Cassiope tetragona 6 Alpine fescue Festuca ovina 41 Creeping juniper Juniperus horizontalis 77 Leafless pyrola Pyrola asarifolia 7 Alpine milk-vetch Astragalus alpinus 42 Creeping
  • Abstracts Annual Scientific Meeting ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᕐᓯᐅᑎᒥᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒃ

    Abstracts Annual Scientific Meeting ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᕐᓯᐅᑎᒥᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒃ

    Abstracts Annual Scientific Meeting ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᕐᓯᐅᑎᒥᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒃ 2016 Réunion scientifique annuelle 5-9/12/2016, Winnipeg, MB ASM2016 Conference Program Oral Presentation and Poster Abstracts ABSTRACTS FROBISHER BAY: A NATURAL LABORATORY complete habitat characterization. This recent sampling FOR THE STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL effort recorded heterogeneous substrates composed of CHANGE IN CANADIAN ARCTIC MARINE various proportions of boulder, cobbles, gravel, sand HABITATS. and mud forming a thin veneer over bedrock at water depths less than 200 metres. Grab samples confirm Aitken, Alec (1), B. Misiuk (2), E. Herder (2), E. the relative abundance of mollusks, ophiuroids and Edinger (2), R. Deering (2), T. Bell (2), D. Mate(3), C. tubiculous polychaetes as constituents of the infauna Campbell (4), L. Ham (5) and V.. Barrie (6) in the inner bay. Drop video images captured a diverse (1) University of Saskatchewan (Saskatoon, Canada); epifauna not previously described from the FRBC (2) Department of Geography, Memorial University of research. A variety of bryozoans, crinoid echinoderms, Newfoundland (St. John’s, NL, Canada); sponges and tunicates recorded in the images remain (3) Polar Knowledge Canada (Ottawa, Ontario, to be identified. Habitat characterization will allow us Canada); to quantify ecological change in benthic invertebrate (4) Marine Resources Geoscience, Geological Survey of species composition within the habitat types represented Canada (Dartmouth, NS, Canada); at selected sampling stations through time. Such long- (5) Canada-Nunavut Geoscience Office, Natural term studies are crucial for distinguishing directional Resources Canada (Iqaluit, NU, Canada); change in ecosystems. Marine Geological Hazards (6) Marine Geoscience, Geological Survey of Canada and Seabed Disturbance: Extensive multibeam (Sidney, BC, Canada) echosounding surveys have recorded more than 250 submarine slope failures in inner Frobisher Bay.
  • December 2012 Number 1

    December 2012 Number 1

    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
  • Wild Ungulate Herbivory of Willow on Two National Forest Allotments in Wyoming Paul J

    Wild Ungulate Herbivory of Willow on Two National Forest Allotments in Wyoming Paul J

    Rangeland Ecol Manage 62:460–469 | September 2009 Wild Ungulate Herbivory of Willow on Two National Forest Allotments in Wyoming Paul J. Meiman,1 Mark S. Thorne,2 Quentin D. Skinner,3 Michael A. Smith,3 and Jerrold L. Dodd4 Authors are 1Assistant Professor, Forest, Rangeland and Watershed Stewardship Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA; 2State Range Extension Specialist, Human Nutrition, Food and Animal Science Department, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA; 3Professors, Department of Renewable Resources, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA; and 4Chair/Professor, Agricultural Department, Cameron University, Lawton, OK 73505, USA. Abstract Willows (Salix) are important riparian plants and often used to indicate riparian condition. Many herbivores feed on willows, but there is limited information about willow browsing by wildlife except in national parks. This study was conducted to estimate wild ungulate herbivory of willow on two US Forest Service allotments in northern Wyoming and to compare these values to published estimates for national parks. We also compared total annual and seasonal willow utilization by wildlife between sites dominated by willows of different heights. The effects of height category, site, and season on willow utilization were determined with a repeated measures analysis. Four permanent willow utilization transects were established at each of six study sites per allotment on two allotments, in communities supporting planeleaf (Salix planifolia Pursh), Wolf’s (Salix wolfii Bebb), Drummond’s (Salix drummondiana Barratt ex Hook.), or Eastwood’s (Salix eastwoodiae Cock. ex A. Heller) willow. Twenty-five twigs were marked per transect (distributed across 6–12 plants/transect).
  • A Guide to the Identification of Salix (Willows) in Alberta

    A Guide to the Identification of Salix (Willows) in Alberta

    A Guide to the identification of Salix (willows) in Alberta George W. Argus 2008 Devonian Botanical Garden Workshop on willow identification Jasper National Park, Alberta 2 Available from: George W. Argus 310 Haskins Rd, Merrickville R3, Ontario, Canada K0G 1N0 email: [email protected] http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/willow/index.html 3 CONTENTS Preface............................................................................................................................... 5 Salicaceae ...........…………………...........……........................................……..........…. 8 Classification ..........……………….…..….................................................….............…. 9 Some Useful Morphological Characters .......................................................….............. 11 Key to the Species.............................................................................................................13 Taxonomic Treatment .........................................................…..……….………............ 18 Glossary .....………………………………………....…..................………...........….... 61 Cited and Selected References ......................................................................................... 64 Salix Web Sites ...................……..................................……..................……............…. 68 Distribution Maps ............................................................................................................ 69 TABLES Table 1. Comparison of Salix athabascensis and Salix pedicellaris ..............................
  • Chapter 10 • Principles of Conserving the Arctic's Biodiversity

    Chapter 10 • Principles of Conserving the Arctic's Biodiversity

    Chapter 10 Principles of Conserving the Arctic’s Biodiversity Lead Author Michael B. Usher Contributing Authors Terry V.Callaghan, Grant Gilchrist, Bill Heal, Glenn P.Juday, Harald Loeng, Magdalena A. K. Muir, Pål Prestrud Contents Summary . .540 10.1. Introduction . .540 10.2. Conservation of arctic ecosystems and species . .543 10.2.1. Marine environments . .544 10.2.2. Freshwater environments . .546 10.2.3. Environments north of the treeline . .548 10.2.4. Boreal forest environments . .551 10.2.5. Human-modified habitats . .554 10.2.6. Conservation of arctic species . .556 10.2.7. Incorporating traditional knowledge . .558 10.2.8. Implications for biodiversity conservation . .559 10.3. Human impacts on the biodiversity of the Arctic . .560 10.3.1. Exploitation of populations . .560 10.3.2. Management of land and water . .562 10.3.3. Pollution . .564 10.3.4. Development pressures . .566 10.4. Effects of climate change on the biodiversity of the Arctic . .567 10.4.1. Changes in distribution ranges . .568 10.4.2. Changes in the extent of arctic habitats . .570 10.4.3. Changes in the abundance of arctic species . .571 10.4.4. Changes in genetic diversity . .572 10.4.5. Effects on migratory species and their management . .574 10.4.6. Effects caused by non-native species and their management .575 10.4.7. Effects on the management of protected areas . .577 10.4.8. Conserving the Arctic’s changing biodiversity . .579 10.5. Managing biodiversity conservation in a changing environment . .579 10.5.1. Documenting the current biodiversity . .580 10.5.2.